Human right to Shelter - UK needs to address the housing crisis.

[scousemouse]

perhaps there would be enough homes to go round if the 'gates' to the country where closed. It will be a nightmare for us all in January................

[Jeffrey Shaw]

It is accepted that people need water, food, shelter to live.

Yes, although this already tells us that the thread's going to be another of your diatribes...

 

It is a human right to have these things

No, that's nonsense.

 

or at least be allowed to produce your own.

"Allowed"? No-one needs "allowing" to do anything.

 

UK law works on the basis of freedom to do anything on one's own property (unless restricted by law) and freedom to behave interpersonally as one wishes (ditto). So the concept of 'human rights' is self-evidently an alien and unnecessary add-on.

 

Hence the UK does not need to address the 'housing crisis' that you'd like there to be.

[chem1st]

 

UK law works on the basis of freedom to do anything on one's own property (unless restricted by law) and freedom to behave interpersonally as one wishes (ditto). So the concept of 'human rights' is self-evidently an alien and unnecessary add-on.

 

Hence the UK does not need to address the 'housing crisis' that you'd like there to be.

 

What about those who lack property? Those born as non-landowners?

 

Where is their freedom?

 

They cannot grow food, or build a house.

 

Yet they pay taxes and what not. Many go on to fight for their country, come back landless and jobless and end up homeless.

 

Because of some messed up violent legal system and sense of ownership wrt the land we all must use and can never truly own.

 

Land is free – as free as sunshine, air and water. However, the further fact is that we think it can be owned, and this has a serious effect on the distribution of wealth.

 

That land is free by nature cannot be disputed.

 

It is here when we arrive, and we cannot take it when we leave. By natural law, all must have equal rights to its use. But we have devised a system of absolute ownership with the right to charge a rent to a user. This is completely entrenched in the law of the land.

 

Of course, man must be able to use land for a reasonable term so as to be able to bring his product to completion and sale, and also to continue in business. The use of certain pieces of land bring benefits, either due to fertility, or more importantly, due to facilities provided by the community around.

 

So the question is, how to recognise the freedom of land, while providing security of tenure, and return to the community the result of its efforts as they apply to each piece of land. If we do not upset the laws we have too much, so much the better.

[monkey104]

Oooh! Deja vu!

[L00b]

And there lies the problem. People are banned from utiliing the land to their own advantage. if they could utilise the land, then we would soon be rid of grotesque inequalities and poverty.

Hang on, hang on: you were on about building quality houses. Nothing about the land they sit on.

 

Now, even if the land was given to them, my question stands: how are people housed and fed at society's expense going to build a quality house? What with?

 

Or are we supposed to buy them the bricks, mortar, tiles, windows, fixtures, fittings, furniture, tools, cranes, cement mixers, etc, etc. as well as given them the land, in your utopia?

 

 

To own something one did not create whilst depriving others of access is violence, and puts one at a significant advantage to those deprived of access. To not have to pay tax (compensation) for doing this, tilts the odds firmly in ones favour. They live somewhere tax free, whilst others must be forced to pay a tax if they wish to do so, be it to the state or to private individuals.

You speak with forked tongue, me still no understand

 

Clearer, please.

[AdamSmith]

perhaps there would be enough homes to go round if the 'gates' to the country where closed. It will be a nightmare for us all in January................

 

very very true good post:thumbsup:

[tinfoilhat]

Hang on, hang on: you were on about building quality houses. Nothing about the land they sit on.

 

Now, even if the land was given to them, my question stands: how are people housed and fed at society's expense going to build a quality house? What with?

 

Or are we supposed to buy them the bricks, mortar, tiles, windows, fixtures, fittings, furniture, tools, cranes, cement mixers, etc, etc. as well as given them the land, in your utopia?

 

 

You speak with forked tongue, me still no understand

 

Clearer, please.

 

You won't get an answer mate, I've been asking for months what suddenly qualifies Wayne and wayentta slob into proper builders rather than a couple of idiots with a few pallets and a bit of tarpaulin.

[chem1st]

You won't get an answer mate, I've been asking for months what suddenly qualifies Wayne and wayentta slob into proper builders rather than a couple of idiots with a few pallets and a bit of tarpaulin.

 

They start basic and fund the building of a house (be it by their own labour or by others, by exchanging theirs).

[number27]

To yet again quote good old Radio 2, they said today that Barrett had revealed 150,000 new homes had been built this year, however planning apps throughout the UK had seen 400,000 apps accepted. There is enough land, but is there the money to fund the builds? The gov is helping by offering a 1st time buyer scheme, but this is funded by the taxpayer, so that can only drain funds away from building quality council homes. It seems the gov are pulling the tug-o-war rope from both ends.

[chem1st]

Hang on, hang on: you were on about building quality houses. Nothing about the land they sit on.

 

Now, even if the land was given to them, my question stands: how are people housed and fed at society's expense going to build a quality house? What with?

 

Just a small plot tax free. larger plots would require more tax.

 

Citizens income. They could afford to build a small modest house, nothing grand, but decent nonetheless.

 

Or are we supposed to buy them the bricks, mortar, tiles, windows, fixtures, fittings, furniture, tools, cranes, cement mixers, etc, etc. as well as given them the land, in your utopia?

 

We already do the above, or at least, we have done, and we can build social housing, but we can also allow others to build their own as well.

 

You speak with forked tongue, me still no understand

 

Clearer, please.

 

If there are two loafs of bread and just me and you, and we each require one to survive, if one controls the bread, he has power over the other.

 

To tax the bread and force it to be shared is best thing to do. There is an issue of unfairness, if one spends his time making the two loaves and the other does nothing.

 

But when it comes to land, it was not created by man. it is not property in that sense. The location naturally belongs to all and should be shared. Labour can be mixed with the land, and the improvement become private property, but the land itself, and more importantly the location, should be shared by all. For exclusive use of a large valuable location, one should pay tax. For the exclusive use of little worthless location, one should receive compensation.

 

The value of improvements rightfully being private property, but the land/location belonging to the whole of society, with it's economic rent being paid out to society.

 

---------- Post added 12-09-2013 at 22:56 ----------

 

To yet again quote good old Radio 2, they said today that Barrett had revealed 150,000 new homes had been built this year, however planning apps throughout the UK had seen 400,000 apps accepted. There is enough land, but is there the money to fund the builds? The gov is helping by offering a 1st time buyer scheme, but this is funded by the taxpayer, so that can only drain funds away from building quality council homes. It seems the gov are pulling the tug-o-war rope from both ends.

 

We need planning permission there for 2million homes, so that 400 000 can be built per year, and we should be giving permission for 400 000 new homes per year.

 

The cost of housing would fall dramatically. Small builders could thrive and build a variety of housing. No need for estates of small Barrett boxes.